Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
AUDIENCES TODAY
The audience is the best judge of anything. They cannot be lied to. Truth
brings them closer. A moment that lags theyre gonna cough.
(Barbra Streisand, Newsweek, 5 January 1970)
media layering. Today people actively add complexity to the range of information to which they are exposed by mixing media, media sources and media
activities. If we compare this media environment with the traditional idea of an
audience as the people present at a performance in a theatre or at a concert, it
is obvious that there has been a rapid and dramatic expansion of what it now
means to be an audience.
The frequency, range and immediacy of media engagements that link people
to the information flows that are the life blood of the information society
have obviously been precipitated by the proliferation of new technologies, the
convergence of old and new media technologies and the globalization
of communication environments. Separately and together, new technologies,
globalization and convergence create new opportunities for people to access
information and they pose significant challenges for contemporary understandings of media audiences and the significance of their activities. Evidence
of the type of impact this change has had on what counts as audience activity
was demonstrated by the emergence in the 1990s of reality TV.
AUDIENCES TODAY
evoked unprecedented ratings and intensity of TV viewer involvement. Importantly, Big Brother offered viewers room to intervene in the onscreen world of the
programme. At first this was limited to voting on which participant/contestant
should be voted out of the Big Brother house and off the screen and this
telephone voting constituted an added income stream for the production company. But viewer involvement did not stop at the telephone. In Britain, viewers
gathered outside the Big Brother house to welcome out the contestants voted
off the programme that week: other fans tried to evade security and invade the
house itself. Many started dressing to look like contestants, or mimicked personal traits and characteristics of the participants, and by the time an Australian
version of the programme was broadcast in 2001, these activities had been
incorporated into the programme planning. In addition, participants inside and
their support groups outside the house began to politicize the voting by
engaging in rigging tactics, using mobile phones and automatic number redial
techniques, to try and ensure their candidate in the house emerged the winner.
The intensity of emotional involvement exhibited by viewers of reality TV
led programme executives to consider new ways to monitor, channel and exploit
viewer interest. The usual press, radio and TV promotion and programmebased news therefore expanded to include website and email initiatives, and the
development of streaming technologies for TV and radio on the world wide
web offered additional opportunities for actively recruiting and estimating
viewer response to the programmes on a daily basis. The new strategies for
engaging audiences invariably required unprecedented levels of interactivity
between the production company and the public. Viewers were encouraged to
visit the website, and for a small subscription fee, could buy additional access
to coverage of the more intimate activities and interests of the participants.
Viewers freely emailed opinions and reactions, likes and dislikes, directly to the
programme websites. Internet technologies therefore allowed production staff
more immediate, detailed and specific feedback from viewers than could be
gained from syndicated ratings services (see Chapter 3), and provided them
with the option of collaborating more closely with audiences in the provision of
a greater viewing pleasure.
The Big Brother phenomenon was in many ways a watershed for our understanding of media audiences. It demonstrated forcefully one of the central
tenets proposed in this book: that a mass media phenomenon cannot be
explained by studying audiences or people factors alone. Viewing, listening
and/or reading are events that invite participation, and peoples participation in
media events can take many and varied forms. Increasingly the ways of being an
audience for a particular story or character set involves engaging with several
media and seeking out or piecing together the story across multiple media.
Being an audience now has an investigative dimension, and audience curiosity is
AUDIENCES TODAY
to discuss the films, books or TV programmes they have seen that provoke
comment or reflection about the world around us.
Generally speaking, being part of an audience means being part of a media
event, where people engage with mediated information. People are audiences
when they are in an audience and in audience. All media events are audience
events since they require people to hang out in media time-spaces where they
physically, mentally and emotionally engage with media materials, technologies
and power structures. The audience event invokes the power relations that
structure the media as social institutions and delimit the options available
to people for involvement in the means of cultural production. Human groups
have specified such arrangements for telling stories from time immemorial. For
example, the anthropologist Bronislaw Malinowski (1954 [1948]) carried out
fieldwork among the Trobriand Islanders of New Guinea in the 1920s. During
his fieldwork he noted that the Islanders made special arrangements for telling
different types of stories. Myths, for example, were regarded as true and sacred
explanations of the origins of the world, and legends explained why certain
clans held power and others did not, while the fairy tale was told for the
amusement and enjoyment of the listeners and to promote sociability among
them. Unlike the other story forms, he noted that for fairy tales:
Every story is owned by a member of the community. Each story, though
known by many, may be recited only by the owner; he may, however,
present it to someone else by teaching that person and authorizing him to
retell it. But not all the owners know how to thrill and to raise a hearty
laugh, which is one of the main ends of such stories. A good raconteur
has to change his voice in the dialogue, chant the ditties with due temperament, gesticulate, and in general play to the gallery.
(Malinowski 1954/1948: 102)
Even the telling of fairy stories can be surrounded by conventions that differentiate who is permitted to tell the story and who may listen, and by, in this
case at least, communal endorsement of arrangements made to ensure that
audiences can hear the story told well. It is this type of arrangement that
we find, in a much more highly regulated and institutionalized form, in the
relations between mass media and audiences. Rights to produce and to tell the
stories that delight and entertain audiences have been licensed to the media
industries. The power structure, evident in the media industries control of
media production, in turn governs who creates and who engages with media,
and it presupposes the involvement of peoples bodies, their physical being, in
the time-spaces media create. In the complex communications environments
and knowledge spaces that characterize the Information Age, audience events
occupy an increasingly pivotal role as the means by which knowledge is
AUDIENCES TODAY
transformed into social, cultural, economic and political action. The media
event, then, involves simultaneously the minutiae of personal audience interests
and actions and the complex sets of conditions that are brought into play to
ensure the ongoing production of the cultures stories.
Broadly speaking five aspects of media events recur as sources of media
research interest:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
In all audience research, certain assumptions are made about what aspects
of the media event are acting on audiences and about whether or not such
influence is likely to benefit them. In subcultures and fan research, for
example, the aim is to trace the modes by which subcultural identity is maintained or threatened by the media and its patterns of representation, both of
people and their perspectives on current events. Subcultures research considers:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
who the subculture is in terms of its history and of its current sociocultural situation;
what types of media activities members engage in or organize for
themselves;
how media materials orient the group in time and space by assisting group
members to better understand the past, the present or their future direction;
how the subculture is empowered (or not) by the power relations that
structure the media event;
how the members of the subculture interpret by accepting, negotiating
or resisting the meanings privileged by the textual structure of the media
message.
only easily verifiable audience demographics (age, sex, and so on) are
taken into account in determining audience composition;
|
2.
3.
4.
5.
AUDIENCES TODAY
important to understand at least the basic terms used in ratings analysis and
to gain a better understanding of how broadcasters and advertisers think about
audiences.
The basic principles and techniques of ratings research were developed in the
early days of mass broadcasting. Syndicated ratings services have been available
to the broadcasting industries since the mid-1930s (Beville 1988: 258). While
the recording and processing of audience measurement has been transformed
over the years, the basic procedures and formulae used have remained constant. Recently, however, the relevance of people meters and diaries has been
challenged by new technologies for recording and analysing ratings data. New
information technologies allow audiences to be monitored, and their consumer
decision-making analysed, more quickly and more thoroughly than ever before.
The internet allows peoples net-surfing to be followed and analysed for commercial opportunities. The computing power of the Information Age has led
audience measurement researchers to be able to embrace a new-found interest in
the relationship between broadcast and internet service providers and their
client audiences. Chapter 3 therefore concludes with some discussion of cyber
activities where audiences and industry engage in the same or parallel activities,
like data mining, software co-development, news production and file sharing.
The internet is a media space where industry and audience rights are currently
hotly disputed, while still in the process of being defined and developed. In
this context, one aspect of the media event considered least relevant for ratings
analysis in the past that is the analysis of what audiences do with the
information they gather from the internet emerges as the site of contestation
over future media growth.
The history of audience research is littered with the corpses of studies that
have tried and failed to demonstrate, once and for all, a cause and effect
relationship between media message and receiver behaviour. Chapter 4 therefore provides a journey through the effects literature, moving from early concerns with propaganda through to the more contemporary debates that
question whether mass media have any effect at all. Whilst there is little doubt,
in the literature as much as amongst armchair philosophers, that the media play
an important role in contributing to the social, economic and cultural environment in which we live, attempting to show precisely that this message causes
that behaviour is rather a lost cause. Chapter 4 thus maps out the chronological
development of the cause-effect paradigm and shows how researchers have
come full circle from early audience theories which insisted that there was a
simple one-way flow of influence from the media to the audience, through a
rejection of audience passivity, back to a serious concern over the influence of,
in particular, violent media content on criminal or violent activity. Along the
way, we consider the still controversial view that watching violent films or
10
AUDIENCES TODAY
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
While the Information Age has introduced new media and new forms, and
allowed people to organize themselves as audiences in novel ways, the tools
available to the media researcher (for example, questionnaires, interviews,
observation, focus groups) remain the same, even though we are now able to
combine them and analyse them in different ways. Moreover, new media do
not always consign older media to the scrap heap, and while the internet may
suggest new challenges for audience research, the middle-aged technologies
such as TV and radio are still the media most widely used. In fact, we can argue
that the new technologies have stimulated innovative programme development
for free-to-air television and talk-back radio by demonstrating the relevance of
interactivity for mass media contexts.
Readers might want to note that there is a companion Reader to this book,
Critical Readings: Media and Audiences (edited by Virginia Nightingale and
Karen Ross 2003). Readings which appear there and which are relevant to
chapters in this book are identified at the end of each chapter. We have also
included a glossary of terms at the end of the book and these are indicated in
the text by bold italics.
11